Patent Litigation

News & Analysis as of

En Banc CAFC Requires UCC Sale For On Sale Bar

In an en banc decision issued in The Medicines Company v. Hospira, Inc., the Federal Circuit determined that in order for a commercial transaction to trigger the on-sale bar of § 35 USC 102(b), it must “bear the general...more

Federal Circuit Confirms Post-Licensure Notice of Commercial Marketing Is Mandatory in Biosimilar Litigation

On July 5, 2016, a unanimous Federal Circuit panel held that Apotex failed to give Amgen proper notice of commercial marketing required by the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act (“BPCIA” or “Biologics Act”) and...more

Federal Circuit Patent Updates - July 2016 #2

WBIP, LLC v. Kohler Co. (No. 2015-1038, -1044, 7/19/16) (Moore, O'Malley, Chen) - Moore, J. Affirming denial of JMOL that patent was invalid as obvious and lacked an adequate written description, affirming finding of...more

Subsequent Employment Agreement Assigning Inventor's Intellectual Property Rights Does not Defeat Standing for Inventions Created...

The plaintiff, Odyssey Wireless ("Odyssey") filed four separate actions for patent infringement against Defendants Apple, Samsung, LG, and Motorola, alleging infringement of U.S. Patent Nos. 7,881,393; 8,199,837; 8,576,940;...more

Federal Circuit: A Biosimilar Applicant Must Provide Notice of Intent to Market a Biosimilar Product, No Exceptions

On July 5, 2016, in Amgen v. Apotex (No. 2016-1308), the Federal Circuit again held that a biosimilar applicant must provide its biologic competitor with 180 days’ notice of intent to commercially market a biosimilar product....more

Revenge of the Present Invention

Patentees suing alleged infringers have learned from a long history of federal district court and Federal Circuit rulings that (paraphrasing the Miranda warning given to criminal suspects) “anything you say [in the patent or...more

Where’s My %$^&# Dollar?

The issue of consideration in an assignment is always in the background, but only occasionally comes up. In Memorylink Corp. v. Motorola Solutions, Inc., 773 F.3d 1266, 113 USPQ2d 1088 (Fed. Cir. 2014), the Federal Circuit...more

Sale of Manufacturing Services Does Not Trigger On Sale Bar Under Pre-AIA §102

In The Medicines Company v. Hospira, Inc., [2014-1469, 2014,1504] (July 11, 2016), the en banc Federal Circuit reversed a panel decision finding that U.S. Patent Nos. 7,582,727 and 7,598,343 were invalid under the on-sale bar...more

Recent Decision in Halo Requires Reconsideration of Summary Judgment Motion on Willfulness

In a multi-district litigation, the district court had previously granted summary judgment in favor of the defendants on the issue of willful infringement. After the Supreme Court's decision in Halo Electronics, Inc. v. Pulse...more

CAFC Dissects Alice Patent Eligibility Analysis in Bascom Global Internet Services

This case arose on an appeal from the grant of a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim, with the district court finding the asserted claims of Bascom’s U.S. Patent No. 5,987,606 were invalid as a matter of law under...more

Not All Processes That Employ Only Independently Known Steps are Unpatentable

In Rapid Litigation Management Ltd. v. Cellzdirect, Inc., [2015-1570] (July 5, 2016), the Federal Circuit vacated summary judgment that U.S. Patent No. 7,604,929 on hepatocytes capable of surviving multiple freeze-thaw cycles...more

Court Report - July 2016

About Court Report: Each week we will report briefly on recently filed biotech and pharma cases. Eli Lilly and Company et al. v. Apotex Inc. et al. 1:16-cv-00475; filed June 22, 2016 in the District Court of...more

Patent Law: Making On-Sale Bar Jurisprudence Coherent

“Rather than rest our decision on formalities, our focus is on what makes our on-sale bar jurisprudence coherent: preventing inventors from filing for patents a year or more after the invention has been commercially marketed,...more

I Win? No Fair!

In SkyHawke Technologies, LLC v, Deca International Corp., [2016-1325, 2016,1326] (July 15, 2015), the Federal Circuit granted Deca’s motion to dismiss SkyHawke’s appeal of a PTAB Decision in a reexamination on the grounds...more

Federal Circuit Rules for The Medicines Company in Patent Litigation

In an en banc decision on July 12, 2016 in The Medicines Co. v. Hospira, Inc., the Federal Circuit established the circumstances under which a product manufactured according to product-by-process claims is invalid under the...more

Patent Due Diligence and Evaluation After the AIA

Many factors must be considered for due diligence and valuation of a patent portfolio. The patent owner’s desire to have broad claims that capture a large number of infringements must be tempered against its need for claims...more

USPTO Patent Eligibility Guidance In View Of CellzDirect And Sequenom

On July 14, 2016, the USPTO issued a Memorandum to the Patent Examining Corps on patent eligibility in view of recent court decisions. The July 2016 Memorandum extracts more guidance for assessing patent eligibility from the...more

The Commercial Marketing Provisions of the Biologics Act are Mandatory

In Amgen Inc. v. Apotex Inc., [2016-1308] (July 5, 2016), the Federal Circuit affirmed a preliminary injunction against Apotex from entering the market until 180 days after giving Amgen Notice after receiving its FDA license....more

Janssen Seeks Injunction Against Remicade Biosimilar Based On Cell Culture Patent

In a complaint filed June 14, 2016, Janssen Biotech Inc. seeks a preliminary injunction that would bar Celltrion and Hospira from selling the biosimilar version of Remicade® (infliximab) that received FDA approval April 2016,...more

Court denies motion to transfer to Massachusetts

The disputed product is pembrolizumab. This Delaware litigation involves invalidity defenses. There is related litigation in the District of Massachusetts involving an inventorship challenge. That court had ordered...more

En Banc: Federal Circuit Provides Guidance on Application of On-Sale Bar to Contract Manufacturers

Pharmaceutical and biotech companies breathed a sigh of relief Monday when the Federal Circuit unanimously ruled in a precedential opinion that the mere sale of manufacturing services to create embodiments of a patented...more

Rising Tide of State-Enacted Patent Reform

It started with Vermont in 2013. Since then, over half the states have enacted legislation aimed at curbing patent infringement suits from non-practicing entities. Now, the band may add another member: Massachusetts....more

What Type of Sale Constitutes an On-Sale Bar?

An invention cannot be patented if it was ready for patenting and was subject to a commercial offer for sale more than one year before the application was filed. This so-called “on-sale bar” can also be used to invalidate a...more

Federal Circuit Finds That Use of a Contract Manufacturer Does Not Trigger the On-Sale Bar Provision

The court’s decision provides insight into which activities trigger the on-sale bar provision. On July 11, in The Medicines Co. v. Hospira, Inc., No. 14-1469 (Fed. Cir. July 11, 2016), the U.S. Court of Appeals for the...more

Federal Circuit Limits On-Sale Bar’s Reach

If you were concerned that outsourcing the manufacture of your invention before you filed your patent application triggered a "sale" that could put your patent at risk, you can rest easy. In The Medicines Company v....more

3,428 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 138
JD Supra Readers' Choice 2016 Awards

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:

Sign up to create your digest using LinkedIn*

*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.

Already signed up? Log in here

*With LinkedIn, you don't need to create a separate login to manage your free JD Supra account, and we can make suggestions based on your needs and interests. We will not post anything on LinkedIn in your name. Or, sign up using your email address.
×